I recently found out that I'm directly descended from Aphrodite, so it's no wonder everyone finds me so incredibly attractive. In fact, my great-great-great-x100 grandfather was her famous Trojan son, Aeneas. That's what she told me when she came down from Olympus to visit me, anyway...

Napoleon wrote:As to 50 gnerations, I think what my father found was that it was fairly close...I think it goes like this: his daughter married one of my close relatives. It gets confusing, so I'll have to study some more.

I'm afraid you're missing the point, during 50 generations, there would have to be 50 people who weren't closely related to the person they married (I hope!), basically thinning out the part of Charlemagne each descendant "has", for example, Charlemagne's daughter would only be 1/2 Charlemagne, and 1/2 her mother. Her kids would be only 1/4 Charlemagne, as they only take half of her half. Their kids would be 1/8 Charlemagne, and so forth and so forth.After 50 generations you would indeed be 1/1120000000000000 part Charlemagne (rounded in your favour). Note that in this case you would be a direct descendant straight down the line from Charlemagne. So is that really worth telling everyone?

Between plotting to kill you all and chasing balls of yarn, I also build MOCs

Napoleon wrote:As to 50 gnerations, I think what my father found was that it was fairly close...I think it goes like this: his daughter married one of my close relatives. It gets confusing, so I'll have to study some more.

I'm afraid you're missing the point, during 50 generations, there would have to be 50 people who weren't closely related to the person they married (I hope!), basically thinning out the part of Charlemagne each descendant "has", for example, Charlemagne's daughter would only be 1/2 Charlemagne, and 1/2 her mother. Her kids would be only 1/4 Charlemagne, as they only take half of her half. Their kids would be 1/8 Charlemagne, and so forth and so forth.After 50 generations you would indeed be 1/1120000000000000 part Charlemagne (rounded in your favour). Note that in this case you would be a direct descendant straight down the line from Charlemagne. So is that really worth telling everyone?

Oh, I get your point, now. Thanks for kindly explaining! I only mentioned here because it makes my ancestors interesting, not me special, any way though.

Thanks!

P.S. I also hoped they weren't related to the people they married!

"There are two powers in this world, the sword and the pen; and in the end the former is always conquered by the latter"- Napoleon Bonaparte

Napoleon wrote:As to 50 gnerations, I think what my father found was that it was fairly close...I think it goes like this: his daughter married one of my close relatives. It gets confusing, so I'll have to study some more.

<snip> there would have to be 50 people who weren't closely related to the person they married (I hope!) <snip>

I dunno, that would explain a lot...

about various crazy English kings who claimed they were descended from Charlemagne, I mean.

Napoleon wrote:I'll even admit this: lots of Europeans are related to Charlemagne. It's not wholly uncommon. That's one reason why many presidents are related to him; Charlemagne is almost like the Adam of Europe. See, I just said it's not anything huge, yet interesting to some. When I posted it I expected many other members to say that they, too, were related to Charlemagne.

I find it interesting. I'm fascinated by things like this. Nelson, AC, and Blue have all done a good job, but I will jump in for a bit.

For the record, I too am descended from Charlemagne. I seldom mention it because it is nearly always misunderstood. Here's the deal and why it is very common.

1. ALL the "noble" houses of Europe intermarried extensively. They were all inter-related in odd ways. Generally when two people married, they already were related in some off-hand way. Charlemagne (or Charles the Great in english) was one of the early "nobles" and many families married their kids to his descendants because of the prestige. Therefore, after many generations, nearly all the so-called "noble" families could trace a part of their lineage back to Charlemagne.

2. Due to the first point, I have found that if you can trace any part of your family tree back to a medieval European noble, even a minor one, then you are descended in some fashion from Charlemagne. I've helped a number of people with their family history and several of them have some sort of minor "noble" connection. If they do, eventually it ties into the same family trees of all the "nobility" of Europe and everyone is related.

3. Does this make Charlemagne the "Adam" of Europe? Nope. You have to take into consideration that only the "nobility" were recording their lineage up until 1700s or even later. Therefore, you find records that early, the odds are that its "noble" families. There are still hundreds and thousands of ancestors you have that are not recorded, stretching back the beginning of time.

4. So, while possibly millions of people are descended from Charlemagne, the blood is very diluted. Its like putting a drop of blue food coloring in a glass and constantly pouring the water into ever-increasing buckets of water. Eventually you have a lake, without a tinge of blue, but you can say that the food coloring is still there.

5. Does any of this matter? Not in the least.

I hope this clears up the issue for everyone. If not, there isn't anything more I can do.

Josh

PS. After my wife and I were married, her mother gave me some early family history stuff. I ended up tracing one branch of her mother's family back to a minor nobleman. This, as I mentioned before, tied into the same noble mishmash that I had traced a branch of my family back to. We ended up having a common ancestor 31 generations ago. Yup, you heard right. I married my own 31st cousin.

Thanks for the interesting, intelligent reply, Josh! I was afraid you were just going to say this was off topic. I like your post, it's very well thought out and helps me and others understand ancestory much better.

You marrying your "31st cousin" reminds me of something else I found out about my family history: it is possible that a noble/king( I can't remember his name) on my Dad's side gave my Mom's ancestor land, therefore, my two different family sides could have met centuries before they were related. Kinda wierd, when you think about it.

"There are two powers in this world, the sword and the pen; and in the end the former is always conquered by the latter"- Napoleon Bonaparte

Although I'm not related to any royalty. One of my distant relations was Judge John Bradshaw who was guilty of Regicide. We sent Charles the 1st to be executed. John was made Lord president of the parliamentary commission to try the king. Not exactly the most sought after jobs lolAfter John died and Charles the 2nd came onto the throne. Charles 2 had the bodies of Bradshaw, Cromwell and Henry Ireton exhumed and displayed in chains all day on the gallows at Tyburn. At sunset, the three bodies were all beheaded. The bodies were thrown into a common pit and the heads displayed on pikes at Westminster Hall. Nothing like a posthumous beheading to get you into history books lolOur family probably had a castle and houses but we lost them and fled overseas.

The guy was so popular that while he served as the Lord President, he had a personal guard and carried a sword at his side at all times. He wore scarlet robes and a “broad-brimmed, bullet-proof beaver hat, which he had covered over with velvet and lined it with steel and he also wore armour underneath his robes. Might explain why most of my family like the colour red

Now I'm just waiting for the series 9 Judge to come out so I can MOC a bit of family history

I don't really know too much about my father's family except that they were Crusaders and nobles, and there's also a little Native American in there somewhere. M mother, however, her side comes from mostly Germany, where a small town shared a name (sort of) with them, and they were also Crusaders and nobles. Later in history one of my great-something grandfathers served in Napoleon's Royal Guard, lived through Waterloo, and moved to the US. He always had a beard due to his bayonet wound in the chin. We still have his cavalry musket.

Some folk we never forget Some kind we never forgive Haven’t seen the back of us yet We’ll fight as long as we live

Unfortunately during the civil war the records department was hit by a stray mortar shell which destroyed 7-800 years of historical records of Irish people... so I will never know! I suppose I could research the English side...

I am a direct descendant from Robert the bruce, king of scotland, on my dads side. The Bruce freed Scotland from English rule in the scottish war for independance, and he also lead a scottish crusade. On my mothers side, I am descended from Malcolm Wallace... It is unclear whether I am descended from William Wallace (started the scottish war for independance) or his brother, but either way I am related to William. The reason it is unclear whether its his brother or him, is because it is not known if William had children or not that survived the war... There is some evidance both ways though.

But the funny thing, is that William Wallace was knighted by Robert the bruce, so my two most famous ancestors certainly met centuries before I was born.

Anyway, I am also descended from presidant Lincoln, so I guess I am a Charlamangian too. I also have Lakota and Tewa native american blood.

And my family owned a castle in france... But we had to sell it recently due to it falling into disrepair and all the money it took to keep it together.

Also, just a thought that occurred to me when reading this thread, is that Aragorn and Arwen in Lotr are related...